Do you think it's not then worth going for any of the bundles (kit lens) in those links I gave?

No, not yet, I’ll check them out tonight.

Qadri wrote:

I think I'd go for auto focus as I've not tried my hand at manual focus. I notice the super bright ones are manual, and a lot dearer too. The power zoom you have is even more expensive! It seems like the body is only 50% of the camera!

Your right. You’ll spend a lot more in lens than you will in the camera body. Camera’s and features will changes year, by year, but good lens are good lens now and in the future. So it’s best to pick the camera system, then the camera that fits your needs, then start investing in lenses.

Qadri wrote:

Because these are bright lenses (especially in the case of prime as you say), are they versatile enough to use outdoors in natural bright light?

Certainly, you can always stop down by making the aperture smaller, ie f22, f11, f8, etc, etc which means less light hits the sensor.

Qadri wrote:

Just thinking from the top of my head, I'd probably have a portrait view for podcasts (head to waste, room for arm movements and a bit of desk perhaps)--would remain in one place. For conferences I'd have a wider view and would be useful to have zoom here...oh, and I'm assuming you can take great pics with them too?

In that case a 45mm Olympus F1.8 will be fine for the head shots from a distance and the 14mm f2.5 will work for the wide angle.

Qadri wrote:

You may be able to use to the WiFi video streaming ability in the G6 to stream directly to USTREAM. I’ve never tried it but that may provide an option.

In that case a 45mm Olympus F1.8 will be fine for the head shots from a distance and the 14mm f2.5 will work for the wide angle.

But the head shots (down to waist) will probably be taken more closely for the podcast type? Both are prime it seems so no room to zoom in and out.

In terms of the wide angle, it won't get too much of the sides in will it from a distance? It still should be mostly on the speaker. Would a zoom here not give the flexibility of both? I.e. focus on a single person and zoom out to get others in? (would still like the wide angle effect--would not want to get too much top and bottom but just people sat next to the speaker on either side).

Also keep in mind that even with a dedicated camcorder, there are areas where a dslr will perform better ie. Low light performance and DOF.

While it's possible that a hybrid interchangeable lens camera (sidebar: the G6 isn't a DSLR) can have shallower DoF than a video camera with a fixed lens, a) it doesn't necessarily have to be the case, and b) shallower DoF isn't necessarily "better". e.g. it requires more precise focusing, and given that focusing while shooting video is often a major difficulty with hybrid photo/video cameras... (To be fair, the G6's focus peaking will help in this particular case.)

Also note that low-light performance probably shouldn't be a major decision making factor because, as I've said before, any halfway decent video production will have a light rig (even if it's just a couple of LED panels with C-stands and diffusers).

Also keep in mind that even with a dedicated camcorder, there are areas where a dslr will perform better ie. Low light performance and DOF.

While it's possible that a hybrid interchangeable lens camera (sidebar: the G6 isn't a DSLR) can have shallower DoF than a video camera with a fixed lens, a) it doesn't necessarily have to be the case, and b) shallower DoF isn't necessarily "better". e.g. it requires more precise focusing, and given that focusing while shooting video is often a major difficulty with hybrid photo/video cameras... (To be fair, the G6's focus peaking will help in this particular case.)

Also note that low-light performance probably shouldn't be a major decision making factor because, as I've said before, any halfway decent video production will have a light rig (even if it's just a couple of LED panels with C-stands and diffusers).

Mark

All valid points. Nothing is concrete in this situation. The user will have to decide ultimately which trade offs their willing to make. It does seem clear however that Qadri wants a double duty unit which the mirrorless G6 fits the bill.

Thanks for those responses. I see what you mean and I do still have Sony HDR SR12e camcorder. I'm assuming the G6 video quality will be noticeably better than my Sony?

Not necessarily. Most cameras can do fine under optimum conditions. It's when they're pushed under less than optimum conditions that you may see a difference. So, instead of buying a new camera, another way to go is to spend the money on equipment (e.g. lights) that will help to create optimum conditions.

One caveat: the SR12e only does 60i, so a keen eye may notice a subtle difference between that footage vs footage shot at 24p (on the G6). The SR12e also maxes out at a lower bit rate, so a keen eye may be able to notice a difference here, too. But again, another way to approach this is to spend your money on other equipment so the CODEC won't be pushed as hard.

BTW the SR12e also captures 10 MP stills/photos.

Quote:

I was hoping to upgrade my point and shoot Canon at some point anyway so if it fails to perform at a good level on video, I'm sure it will do a very good job at taking pics anyway?

Again, not necessarily. And be sure, again, to take your intended delivery/display method into consideration. e.g. most folks would have a very hard time telling the difference between a photo of a family posing in front of the Grand Canyon in broad daylight when posted on Instagram that was taken with an iPhone 4 vs the same shot taken with a Canon 5D.

Quote:

I'm also thinking it could be used for a second camera if it becomes impractical to use for the main shot (we sometimes use an additional side camera when recording speeches for a side shot of the speaker or panning on the audience). In that case I would buy a semi-pro video camera for the main camera, something like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7hHxDh5OcM (interesting video that compares it with the GH3).

Second, note that the AC90 has a tiny sensor which results in really deep DoF. Now, as I noted in my immidiately preceding post, this may not be a bad thing, but be aware that you will be stuck with this. Whereas, you would have other creative options with the G6 (or an AF100 or VG30, for example).

Quote:

I can't justify spending more on the GH3 for ... the unlimited continuous recording (that's for my purposes).

Where did you hear/read that EU GH3s are not limited to 30 minute takes like all other EU hybrid photo/video cameras? I ask because I've heard the exact opposite.

Quote:

hionhifi, like your point about low light as most shooting will be indoors (a lot in the evening indoors too).

As I said previously, a better way to approach this issue is to buy some lights. I say "better" because aperture also affects DoF, so without lights, you are allowing a technical limitation to affect creative choices. Yes, there are circumstances (run-and-gun, ENG, events) when setting up lights is not feasible/practical, but the corollary is that these circumstances are not well suited to a hybrid/photo video camera. It's always preferable to use the appropriate tool for the job.

Yes, but do note that the price listed there is still 60% more than the £550 figure you initially mentioned. And that was my primary point: make sure you're doing an apples to apples comparison. e.g. instead of comparing the SR12e's 12X zoom to a G6 + 14-42mm (3X), a closer comparison would be the SR12e's 12X zoom to the G6 + 14-140mm (10X).

Again, make sure you're doing an apples to apples comparison. i.e. what if you want to zoom from 30mm to 60mm? You can't with those two lenses.

Quote:

Oh and any thoughts on how to do a live podcast/broadcast with the G6? - Help appreciated.

Yes, don't. As I said above, it's always preferable to use the appropriate tool for the job. For streaming over the web, that tool would be a webcam. No need to reinvent the wheel. It'll likely cost you more both monetarily and time-wise, and you may even get poorer results.

Mark

P.S. if you're interested in what I use, I posted a list of my camera gear a while back. In addition to that, I have three sets of ND filters (so I don't have to let light levels affect the aperture I use) and I use a TASCAM DR100 Mark II and Zoom H4n to capture audio.

One caveat: the SR12e only does 60i, so a keen eye may notice a subtle difference between that footage vs footage shot at 24p (on the G6). The SR12e also maxes out at a lower bit rate, so a keen eye may be able to notice a difference here, too. But again, another way to approach this is to spend your money on other equipment so the CODEC won't be pushed as hard.

I'm not sure about these different frame rates (except that 24fps is preferred for the more cinema look and 30 fps for more home video look--there ae other frame rates too?). So 60i is not as good as 24p? Need to try to learn this stuff.

Quote:

Again, not necessarily. And be sure, again, to take your intended delivery/display method into consideration. e.g. most folks would have a very hard time telling the difference between a photo of a family posing in front of the Grand Canyon in broad daylight when posted on Instagram that was taken with an iPhone 4 vs the same shot taken with a Canon 5D.

Some pics of mine have looked fine on HTCs and Iphones but when blown up on a laptop or monitor they are pretty poor, especially in low light. When printed (i.e. for sending abroad) they are worse (grainy). Would be good to have a decent photo camera in this respect.

Quote:

Where did you hear/read that EU GH3s are not limited to 30 minute takes like all other EU hybrid photo/video cameras? I ask because I've heard the exact opposite.

oh, may be wrong but do remember reading it somewhere. Thought the EU regulations add an extra levy for 30 min continuous recording as they class them as video cameras. For premium priced cameras I thought they'd pay the levy as the consumer at that price would not expect such a limit. That's conjecture but do remember reading it and could be wrong as I said.

Quote:

Yes, but do note that the price listed there is still 60% more than the £550 figure you initially mentioned. And that was my primary point: make sure you're doing an apples to apples comparison. e.g. instead of comparing the SR12e's 12X zoom to a G6 + 14-42mm (3X), a closer comparison would be the SR12e's 12X zoom to the G6 + 14-140mm (10X).

That's a good point and does increase the cost. I have quite a bit of liberty of where I place the camera most times but the problem will be on some occasions where I don't and have to be far (large conference settings). I have never zoomed 12x with my Sony. Like the idea of having the small 14-42 to carry out but while it's good for close-up podcast types, it won't be good for the bigger conferences (think I'll need 5x, 6x zoom)so will have to consider the bigger 14-140mm. There seems to be a god deal here (without the limit!): http://www.personal-view.com/faqs/gh3-n ... t-and-body - it does not specify which "power zoom" but I'm assuming it's the 14-140mm.

Quote:

Again, make sure you're doing an apples to apples comparison. i.e. what if you want to zoom from 30mm to 60mm? You can't with those two lenses.

Good point! Makes sense to for 14-140mm. How is it in low light (is it one of the bright ones)?

Quote:

Yes, don't. As I said above, it's always preferable to use the appropriate tool for the job. For streaming over the web, that tool would be a webcam. No need to reinvent the wheel. It'll likely cost you more both monetarily and time-wise, and you may even get poorer results.

We sometimes use a semi-pro camera of a friend that has FireWire (the laptop has FireWire too) and it gives much better results, even on Ustream.

Quote:

P.S. if you're interested in what I use, I posted a list of my camera gear a while back. In addition to that, I have three sets of ND filters (so I don't have to let light levels affect the aperture I use) and I use a TASCAM DR100 Mark II and Zoom H4n to capture audio.

I'm not sure about these different frame rates (except that 24fps is preferred for the more cinema look and 30 fps for more home video look--there ae other frame rates too?). So 60i is not as good as 24p? Need to try to learn this stuff.

First, 60i is not the same as 60p. And "not as good" depends on what your goal is.

But yes, there are other frame rates. Another common one (that the G6 supports) is 60p (NTSC) / 50p (PAL). It's often used for fast action (i.e. sports) and/or slo-mo. (And as a side note: I cannot think of any reason to shoot 30p in a PAL territory. To the best of my knowledge, PAL G6's don't even offer 30p.)

Quote:

Some pics of mine have looked fine on HTCs and Iphones but when blown up on a laptop or monitor they are pretty poor, especially in low light {emphasis added by Mark}. When printed (i.e. for sending abroad) they are worse (grainy). Would be good to have a decent photo camera in this respect.

And again, instead of a new camera, another option would be to add lights (or, for still photos, (off camera) flashes).

Quote:

Thought the EU regulations add an extra levy for 30 min continuous recording as they class them as video cameras. For premium priced cameras I thought they'd pay the levy as the consumer at that price would not expect such a limit.

The first sentence is correct, but as far as I can tell, the conjecture in the second sentence is not. See footnote #3 (about 3/4 down the page):

Well, the lens pictured is a 14-42mm. (note the small print on the front -- Vario 1:3.5-5.6/14-42 ASPH) Also be aware that there could be warranty issues with this type of grey market import.

Quote:

Makes sense to for 14-140mm. How is it in low light (is it one of the bright ones)?

Nope. (And as noted in my post in the other thread, I own two of the original model.)

Quote:

We sometimes use a semi-pro camera of a friend that has FireWire (the laptop has FireWire too) and it gives much better results, even on Ustream.

But even here you're using an appropriate tool (dedicated video camera with Firewire) for the job. You're not trying to "hack" a hybrid photo/video camera that doesn't have Firewire (or even live HDMI out) to do something it's not designed to do.

Quote:

I won't need ND filters if I'm inside right?

Correct, but I mentioned them because in your previous post you asked, "Because these are bright lenses (especially in the case of prime as you say), are they versatile enough to use outdoors in natural bright light?" And stopping down (to f22, as was suggested) can cause diffraction.

And while I'm referring back to that post, re: your comment:

Quote:

I think I'd go for auto focus as I've not tried my hand at manual focus.

Manual focus with both a stationary camera and (more-or-less) stationary subject (which seems like how you will be shooting) isn't that hard.

Also, there are a bunch of Field of View calculators on the web (as well as some smartphone apps). But in order to use them, you will need to be able to guesstimate your distance to your subject.

First, 60i is not the same as 60p. And "not as good" depends on what your goal is.

But yes, there are other frame rates. Another common one (that the G6 supports) is 60p (NTSC) / 50p (PAL). It's often used for fast action (i.e. sports) and/or slo-mo. (And as a side note: I cannot think of any reason to shoot 30p in a PAL territory. To the best of my knowledge, PAL G6's don't even offer 30p.)

Ok and 60p is not the same as 60fps right? And where does 1080p come in all this? To understand frame rates I searched and found thispage very useful: http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/high-frame-rate-video - it seems like for a speech 60fps would look great, getting things to come "alive" almost. One thing it does not mention is that I imagine the file sizes will be much greater. If they are so big that they are unusable then 24fps it is I guess. Also read that Hobbit was done at 48 fps.

Quote:

And again, instead of a new camera, another option would be to add lights (or, for still photos, (off camera) flashes).

But not so easy when you are out and about taking pics of family etc?

Quote:

The first sentence is correct, but as far as I can tell, the conjecture in the second sentence is not. See footnote #3 (about 3/4 down the page):http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/pressrel ... index.html

Ok, GH3 is out of the question.

Quote:

Well, the lens pictured is a 14-42mm. (note the small print on the front -- Vario 1:3.5-5.6/14-42 ASPH) Also be aware that there could be warranty issues with this type of grey market import.

I think it's misleading on their part to use "power zoom"? Thought the picture might just be a standard one taken off the net. But yes, would be too good to be true for 14-140mm at $879. The advantage is that they have no 30 min limit but understand warranty would be hassle in case of a problem. I can actually get it cheaper from UK through discount from work.

Instead of spending quite a bit on a lens like that, I could go second hand for something like this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CANON-FD-BAYO ... 2a31770142 - it's cheap and heard very god things about it. It's manual though but as you said it's not hard to get to know with speaker making not so active movements (other than say body movements). I assume the continuous focus on the G6 would not work with it (from the Panasonic website: The fast, accurate Light Speed AF makes it possible to capture fast-moving subjects clearly.)

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:Makes sense to for 14-140mm. How is it in low light (is it one of the bright ones)?

Nope. (And as noted in my post in the other thread, I own two of the original model.)

You mean I would need lenses geared towards working in low light? (I won't be outside at night, but often indoors with half decent lighting--and sometimes during the day too of course).

Quote:

But even here you're using an appropriate tool (dedicated video camera with Firewire) for the job. You're not trying to "hack" a hybrid photo/video camera that doesn't have Firewire (or even live HDMI out) to do something it's not designed to do.

Problem is that it's not my camera so have to borrow it and increasingly video cameras don't use it and they are fast disappearing from laptops. No fast easy way to do it from camcorders even.

Quote:

Correct, but I mentioned them because in your previous post you asked, "Because these are bright lenses (especially in the case of prime as you say), are they versatile enough to use outdoors in natural bright light?" And stopping down (to f22, as was suggested) can cause diffraction.

Ok I got that. Useful.

Quote:

Also, there are a bunch of Field of View calculators on the web (as well as some smartphone apps). But in order to use them, you will need to be able to guesstimate your distance to your subject.

Something I'll have to look in to as don't understand how they'd work and how you apply it to a lens.

Ok and 60p is not the same as 60fps right? And where does 1080p come in all this? To understand frame rates I searched and found thispage very useful: http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/high-frame-rate-video - it seems like for a speech 60fps would look great, getting things to come "alive" almost. One thing it does not mention is that I imagine the file sizes will be much greater. If they are so big that they are unusable then 24fps it is I guess. Also read that Hobbit was done at 48 fps.

No disrespect intended, but as I said to the person in the "Formualting DSLR gear..." thread, it sounds like you, and more importantly your projects, will benefit greatly from a DP (Directory of Photography aka Cinematographer).

But briefly, the 60 in 60p and 60i denotes 60 frames per second (fps). The p or i denotes progressive or interlaced. And the 1080 denotes vertical resolution.

Also, your concern about file sizes is why there's compression.

(And finally, as an aside, unless you're shooting in 3D with major VFX/CGI (which it doesn't sound like you are), don't worry about what Peter Jackson did on The Hobbit.)

Quote:

But not so easy when you are out and about taking pics of family etc?

True. But I wanted to point out that you were again skipping a step in the process because doing so can come back to bite you later. (see below for an example) Having said that, yes, the comment I made previously can also be applied here: Yes, there are circumstances ... when setting up lights is not feasible/practical, but the corollary is that these circumstances are not well suited to a [cellphone] camera.

But again, do an apples to apples comparison. Specifically, you're comparing a 14-140mm lens to a 35-105mm lens. And yes, as you noted, this Canon lens will not auto-focus on the G6, whereas the Panasonic 14-140mm will.

Also, although the Canon is a bit faster/brighter than the Panasonic, the Canon is not what most folks would consider good in low light. (Generally, that refers to a lens that's at least f2.8, if not faster. Note that all of the primes I listed in the other post are at least f2.8, and all but one are f2.0 or faster.)

Quote:

You mean I would need lenses geared towards working in low light?

Or you can add lights. If you're wondering why I keep harping on this, see below.

Quote:

Something I'll have to look in to as don't understand how [Field of View calculators] work and how you apply it to a lens.

Hypothetical scenario: the camera is positioned at the back of a classroom. So let's say, 30 feet away from the speaker. In order to get a waist-up shot at that distance on a m4/3 camera (2X crop), you'd want a lens around 75mm or so. Fortunately, Olympus makes a 75mm prime that's also very good in low light. (Max aperture is f1.8. Full disclosure: I own one.) But when this lens is used "wide open" (f1.8) with a subject at 30 feet, DoF is just a little over a foot. So if your subject so much as leans forward or takes a step back, s/he will be out of focus. And if s/he writes or references something on the white board behind him/her? Forget about it. So it would be much more practical to stop down to, say, at least f5.6, which will lengthen DoF to around 5 feet. But now you're shooting indoors with an aperture of at least f5.6, so some additional lights will probably be helpful.

And this, as well as frame rate, progressive vs interlaced, etc. is all stuff that a DP can help you with - Mark

No disrespect intended, but as I said to the person in the "Formualting DSLR gear..." thread, it sounds like you, and more importantly your projects, will benefit greatly from a DP (Directory of Photography aka Cinematographer).

No disrespect taken at all. I realised how lacking my knowledge is and I appreciate that you have taken the time out to help me. Yes I read that thread (wish I had the budget he had, I'm on a tight one ). Problem is that I do not know anyone who is at that rank. The couple of do this can just expand on the knowledge we already have and try experimenting. I do see the need though as it seems the real advance in the quality of footage comes in post (and also to know what setting to shoot on in the first place!)...

Quote:

But briefly, the 60 in 60p and 60i denotes 60 frames per second (fps). The p or i denotes progressive or interlaced. And the 1080 denotes vertical resolution.

Also, your concern about file sizes is why there's compression.

Thanks for clearing that. As I acknowledged, more to learn here.

Quote:

True. But I wanted to point out that you were again skipping a step in the process because doing so can come back to bite you later.

Just had my upgrade and I got the HTC One--best smartphone according to all the reviews including on camera but still not great when blowing up, especially from indoor shots. And about lights, you're definitely right and thanks for driving the point home. I do use lights but get annoyed at them fusing often. I still use them on the bigger occasions (e.g. conferences). Will try to use them in more situations and that can save you money on buying lower aperture lenses. Wonder how the standard 14-42mm performs?

Quote:

But again, do an apples to apples comparison. Specifically, you're comparing a 14-140mm lens to a 35-105mm lens. And yes, as you noted, this Canon lens will not auto-focus on the G6, whereas the Panasonic 14-140mm will.

Also, although the Canon is a bit faster/brighter than the Panasonic, the Canon is not what most folks would consider good in low light. (Generally, that refers to a lens that's at least f2.8, if not faster. Note that all of the primes I listed in the other post are at least f2.8, and all but one are f2.0 or faster.

Thought about the Canon because of price really and to use in settings where I will not be close to the subject (conferences/lectures etc.). Got the idea from here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsgrpSRWW1M (makes comparison with Panasonic kit lens). Plus it only has internal zoom (does not stretch out) so thought it would be good for video. Thanks for giving that example. So you think something like the 75mm Olympus prime lens f1.8 will be better than that (although it does not have zoom) with the option of turning up the aperture with additional lights indoors (with moving subject(s))? Problem is it is very expensive £700+. What I don't understand is why the 45mm Olympus with the same aperture of f1.8 is so much cheaper?

Yes I read that thread (wish I had the budget he had, I'm on a tight one ).

Me, too. And that (budget), gets back to finding the appropriate tool (both use-wise and budget-wise) for the job. In my experience, the only people who are usually better off shooting video on a large sensor, interchangeable lens, hybrid photo/video camera are folks on a scripted narrative feature (who have the time to setup, block, light, do multiple takes, etc.) and who also need a "cinematic look" (24p, shallow DoF) on a relatively small budget (and by "relatively small", I mean $10k or so, all in--camera(s), lenses, light rig, audio rig, edit bay, etc.).

You seem to be shooting different types of projects and are on a lower budget. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It just implies that a large sensor, interchangeable lens, hybrid photo/video camera is probably not the most appropriate tool for you.

Also, while experimenting is great (and the best way to find out how to get the most out of your gear), it's a better use of resources to experiment with gear you already have, not spend money on new gear to experiment with.

Quote:

Wonder how the standard 14-42mm performs?

Again, if you want the best tool for the job, you'd be much better off with a dedicated video camera with a 12X zoom instead of the G6 and a 3X zoom.

Quote:

Thought about the Canon because of price really

Ditto my comment above. Yes, the Canon is cheaper than the Panasonic 14-140mm; and yes, we all have our budget limitations. But instead of trying to cut corners and compromise capabilities, a better option is to use/buy something else.

Quote:

So you think something like the 75mm Olympus prime lens f1.8 will be better than that (although it does not have zoom)

No, because, as you noted, you lose all zoom capability with this lens. So unless you plan to buy both an Olympus 75mm and Panasonic 14-140mm, there are better (read: more capable) tools/options. And if you can afford to buy a G6 + 14-140mm + 75mm, there are probably better dedicated video camera options at that price point. (e.g. the AC90 you mentioned earlier.)

Quote:

What I don't understand is why the 45mm Olympus with the same aperture of f1.8 is so much cheaper?

Short answer: physics. The longer (focal length-wise) a lens is, the more it costs to make. (Also, the faster/brighter (aperture-wise) a lens is, the more it costs to make.) Since the 75mm is significantly longer than the 45mm, but has the same fast/bright f1.8 aperture, it costs significantly more than the 45mm. (Full disclosure: I own one of each.) (And in this particular case, while the 45mm is a good lens, the 75mm is considered one of the best m4/3 lenses currently made. i.e. the 75mm is better optically and has better build quality.)

Thanks for sharing such a wonderful review. Lumix is one of the finest presentation of the Panasonic. Even my brother also have the same model and he is satisfied with the image and video quality it provides.

Sorry for the late reply. Had a hectic week. Was thinking about your classroom example and it tells a lot. For a stationary person I guess it's ok with a 75mm (or even 50mm?) prime lens but not where there is more movement or activity happening. If books are in the background of the subject for example (we use that background quite a bit when recording scholars), I guess same rule applies that in that instance they should be quite close to the background (1-2 feet) if indoor with aperture wide open (e.g. f1.?

On the cheaper lens side, a Canon FD 50mm f1.8 can be picked up very cheap. Even the 50mm f1.4 are available for a little more (should be great in low light?) and apart from no autofocus (and need for adapter), is there any other difference?

Thanks for giving the info on why the 75mm Olympus is so expensive. Prices really increase once you start looking at the lenses you need.

This thread has been a real eye opener. Thanks. What we are thinking of doing now is getting this Panasonic for doing recordings of a single speaker (solo) without audience in relatively small rooms (i.e. not halls) with the camera fairly close--something quick and small is good for this and perhaps can get away with having a prime lens (relatively affordable one). It's easy to travel with and mobile so can get it out to record if we are not in a large comfortable setting. Can also use it for taking higher quality pics of the same. Although I must say my new HTC One is taking stunning, sharp pictures (esp. for a mobile phone) and they are not showing visible pixilation when blown up on my screen. Night mode in the dark even works well. It's not as good for doing shallow DoF type pics of course or zooming (digital zoom is v crap) so a decent photo camera has its uses. The 14-42mm kit lens might do for this (and for video) until I get more money in the future to get something with a bigger zoom (like the 14-140mm or perhaps do lens changing to get a big zoom--45-200mm is quite cheap). The 14-42mm might just do for most of the things I'm thinking about using it for, for the time being that is and can then get a prime lens may be in a couple of months (i.e. increase lenses slowly as and when required).

The existing Sony HD camcorder will continue to record the conferences or where there is single speaker plus audience (similar to conference really). This is because there is panning required and zooming in and out--yes I know that experts say zooming in/out is overly used by people but we have to do time from time to time and a proper video camera is best for this as you explained. We can then use the Panasonic G6 as a B-roll camera for a side shot of the speaker or for the audience.

In the future, I could upgrade my Sony to something like AC-90 equivalent (if I continue to cover conferences frequently).

On the cheaper lens side, a Canon FD 50mm f1.8 can be picked up very cheap. Even the 50mm f1.4 are available for a little more (should be great in low light?) and apart from no autofocus (and need for adapter), is there any other difference?

You're still going to run into problems until you start to think of aperture as controlling DoF, not light/exposure level. (another example below)

Quote:

Prices really increase once you start looking at the lenses you need.

Another reason you should look at adding/buying lights instead of fast/bright lenses. It's generally cheaper.

Quote:

What we are thinking of doing now is getting this Panasonic for doing recordings of a single speaker (solo) without audience in relatively small rooms (i.e. not halls) with the camera fairly close--something quick and small is good for this and perhaps can get away with having a prime lens (relatively affordable one).

G6 at 8 feet from the speaker with the Canon FD 50mm f1.4 you mentioned wide open. The 50mm focal length will give you a frame about 2 feet high, so maybe enough for a bust/portrait shot for an interview (although I'd prefer more headroom, pardon the pun), but your DoF will only be a few (3-4) inches. Stopping down to f8 will get you a more useable 2 feet or so. (Although, remember that this is total DoF, so you will have some in front of the subject and some behind. Not 2 feet in front and another 2 feet behind.) But you're not going to be able to expose properly indoors at f8 without lights.